Learning from past pandemic governance: Early response and Public-Private Partnerships in testing of COVID-19 in South Korea

Park, June; Chung, Eunbin

doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105198

Cited by 101 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is clearly the case for Iceland, Malaysia, Malta and more mildly for Singapore, see Figure 5 and Table 5. [34]. For China, UK, Italy and USA the situation is more scattered, but there is optimism at the beginning for UK, Italy and USA, a substantial pessimism of all the considered countries in the last part of the period.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anxiety for the pandemic and trust in financial markets

Cerqueti

Ficcadenti

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated a novel context of global financial distress. This paper enters the related scientific debate and focuses on the relationship between the anxiety felt by the population of a wide set of countries during the pandemic and the trust in the future performance of financial markets. Precisely, we move from the idea -- grounded on some recent literature contributions -- that the volume of Google searches about "coronavirus" can be considered as a proxy of the anxiety and, jointly with the stock index prices, can be used to produce indicators of the population mood -- in terms of pessimism and optimism -- at country level. We analyse the ``very high human developed countries'' according to the Human Development Index plus China and their respective main stock market indexes. Namely, we propose both a temporal and a global measure of pessimism and optimism and provide accordingly a classification of indexes and countries. The results show the existence of different clusters of countries and markets in terms of pessimism and optimism. Moreover, specific regimes along the time emerge, with an increasing optimism spreading during the mid of June 2020. Furthermore, countries with different government responses to the pandemic have experienced different levels of mood indicators, so that countries with less strict lockdown had a higher level of optimism.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anxiety for the pandemic and trust in financial markets

Cerqueti

Ficcadenti

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The COVID-19 pandemic has so far caused unprecedented health, economic, and social impacts globally, with Europe and USA being the most affected regions, while other locations have responded well, such as South Korea who even conducted an election successfully during the first wave of the pandemic ( 72 ). Even within countries there is strong evidence of differing pandemic responses and the impact this has on risk mitigation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID/HIV Co-Infection: A Syndemic Perspective on What to Ask and How to Answer

Gesesew

Mwanri

Stephens

et al. 2021

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present commentary explored the intersecting nature of the COVID-19 and HIV pandemics to identify a shared research agenda using a syndemic approach. The research agenda posits the following questions. Questions around HIV infection, transmission, and diagnosis include: (i) molecular, genetic, clinical, and environmental assessments of COVID-19 in people living with HIV, (ii) alternative options for facility-based HIV testing services such as self- and home-based HIV testing, and (iii) COVID-19 related sexual violence and mental health on HIV transmission and early diagnosis. These and related questions could be assessed using Biopsychosocial and socio-ecological models. Questions around HIV treatment include: (i) the effect of COVID-19 on HIV treatment services, (ii) alternative options for facility-based treatment provision such as community-based antiretroviral therapy groups, and (iii) equitable distribution of treatment and vaccines for COVID-19, if successful. Bickman's logic model and the social determinants of health framework could guide these issues. The impact of stigma, the role of leveraging lessons on sustained intra-behavioral change, the role of medical mistrust and conspiracy beliefs, and the role of digital health on integrated management of HIV care and spectrum of care of COVID-19 need assessment using several frameworks including Goffman's stigma framework, Luhmann's Trust theory, and Gidden's theory of structuration. In conclusion, the potential research agenda of this commentary encompasses a variety of research fields and disciplinary areas—clinicians, laboratory scientists, public health practitioners, health economists, and psychologists—, and suggests several theoretical frameworks to guide examination of complex issues comprehensively.

show abstract

“…Although our study primarily focuses on health department collaborations in the context of chronic disease, the return of infectious disease to the forefront of consciousness in public health due to COVID-19 has highlighted more than ever the importance of strong multisector collaborations [27,28,29]. In managing a coordinated public health response for the pandemic, SHDs and local public health agencies should collaborate with multiple sectors, including state education agencies, school districts, restaurant associations and chains, entertainment venues, and public transportation to address issues such as social distancing protocols and reopening procedures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Power of Partnerships: State Public Health Department Multisector Collaborations in Major Chronic Disease Program Areas

Tsai¹,

Allen²,

Saliba³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Multisector collaboration between state health departments (SHDs) and diverse community partners is increasingly recognized as important for promoting positive public health outcomes, addressing social determinants of health, and reducing health inequalities. This study investigates collaborations between SHDs and different types of organizations addressing chronic disease in and outside of the health sector. Methods SHD employees were randomly selected from the National Association of Chronic Disease Directors membership list for participation in an online survey. Participants were asked about their primary chronic disease work unit (cancer, obesity, tobacco, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and others), as well as their work unit collaborations (exchange of information/cooperation in activities) with organizations in health and non-health sectors. As a measure of the different organizations SHDs collaborated with in health and non-health sectors, a collaboration heterogeneity score for each program area was calculated. One-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc tests were used to assess differences in collaborator heterogeneity between program areas. Results A total of 574 participants were surveyed. Results indicated the cancer program area, along with diabetes and cardiovascular disease, had significantly less collaboration heterogeneity with organizations outside of the health sector compared to the obesity and tobacco program areas. Conclusions Evidence suggests that to address social determinants of health and promote health equity, increased public health collaborations with diverse non-health sector community-based settings is critical.

show abstract

Learning from past pandemic governance: Early response and Public-Private Partnerships in testing of COVID-19 in South Korea

Cited by 101 publications

References 58 publications

Anxiety for the pandemic and trust in financial markets

Anxiety for the pandemic and trust in financial markets

COVID/HIV Co-Infection: A Syndemic Perspective on What to Ask and How to Answer

The Power of Partnerships: State Public Health Department Multisector Collaborations in Major Chronic Disease Program Areas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About